IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
|
|
- Bernice Richards
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 1 of 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEOFFREY CALHOUN, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. v. ) 1:09-CV-3286-TCB ) RICHARD PENNINGTON, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) SPECIAL MASTER QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 29, 2016 COMES NOW, Joe D. Whitley, the appointed Special Master in the abovereferenced case, in furtherance of the duties imposed upon the Special Master by this Court's Order entered June 22, 2016 [Dkt. No. 309] (the "Special Master Order"), and submits this Special Master Quarterly Compliance Report dated September 29, 2016 (the "9/29 Compliance Report"), recommending no further action by the Court at this time beyond entry of the Consent Order Setting Forth Initial Special Master Monitoring, Discovery, and Dispute Resolution Procedures [Dkt. No. 323] (the "Procedures Order"), which was entered September 23, 2016, and deferment of any further action, if any, for the reasons that follow: 1
2 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 2 of 25 PROLOGUE During the first three months of the Special Master's appointment, the Special Master quickly ascertained that an order setting forth initial monitoring, discovery, and dispute resolution procedures would be critical to accomplishing the parties' shared goals of "develop[ing] a collaborative rather than adversarial relationship between the parties" (Special Master Order, at 3(c)) and establishing complete consensus as to the City of Atlanta's compliance with the Court Orders, due, in large part, to mutual communication breakdowns that are not attributable to any one party. This has been the Special Master's primary focus for the first three months of his appointment. As indicated by the Unopposed Motion for Order Setting Forth Initial Special Master Monitoring, Discovery, and Dispute Resolution Procedures [Dkt. No. 321] (the "Unopposed Motion") and the Procedures Order, significant progress has been made in furtherance of these critical objectives, and the Special Master believes and finds that Plaintiffs and the City of Atlanta (the "City") intend to fully comply with the Court Orders (as defined below), the Procedures Order, and the other applicable rules in an effort to achieve a mutual understanding, agreement, and consensus of complete compliance. 2
3 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 3 of 25 Notwithstanding, the Special Master Order requires the Special Master to issue written quarterly reports on compliance with the Court Orders and electronically file such reports with this Court. Accordingly, this 9/29 Compliance Report sets forth the Special Master's initial, limited findings to date regarding the City's compliance, with the understanding that the Special Master will be further investigating, revisiting, and/or supplementing these findings in the next quarterly compliance report, due December 22, 2016, and those that follow. METHODOLOGY In conducting the Special Master's independent investigation and preparing this report, the Special Master has given consideration to (i) relevant pleadings, filings, and discovery in the above-styled case, including, but not limited to, the Court's Orders entered December 8, 2010 [Dkt. No. 265] (the "2010 Order"), December 15, 2011 [Dkt. No. 280] (the "2011 Order"), and May 19, 2015 [Dkt. No. 289] (the "2015 Order") (hereinafter, collectively, the "Court Orders"); (ii) various party and non-party documents, information, and accounts requested and received by the Special Master to date as relevant to the determination of compliance with the Court Orders; and (iii) the parties' direct representations, as officers of the Court, to the Special Master, as an officer of the Court. 3
4 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 4 of 25 Where possible, evidence was reviewed according to a preponderance of the evidence standard to make an initial determination about compliance; however, no formal evidentiary hearing has been held, and, given the recentness of his appointment, the Special Master has not had an opportunity to review all evidence. Additionally, in some instances, the Special Master explicitly finds that additional evidence is needed to formulate a complete opinion on compliance. Therefore, these initial, limited findings are subject to further review and revision, and no party is deemed to have waived any evidentiary rights or objections. INITIAL FINDINGS For purposes of these initial findings, the Special Master utilizes the 2015 Order as a road map because it sets forth fourteen (14) paragraphs of discrete requirements that generally articulate the compliance issues presented by the Court Orders. In an effort to create a more readable document, the Special Master paraphrases the requirements of the 2015 Order below. The Special Master has attempted to accurately paraphrase the requirements and understands and acknowledges that compliance with the Court Orders -- not the Special Master's short form interpretations thereof -- is the relevant inquiry. Accordingly, nothing in this 9/29 Compliance Report, including any paraphrased language, is intended to 4
5 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 5 of 25 (nor shall it) modify, alter, or amend any of this Court's prior orders. To the extent there is any conflict, the Court Orders prevail and are controlling. Paragraph 1 - Requirement to complete in-person training of all sworn APD employees within 90 days, using a format and content acceptable to Plaintiffs, on the topics specified in the 2010 Order. Based on the Special Master's review of the record, there is no dispute as to whether the City actually conducted "Calhoun" training within the relevant time period; however, disputes do exist as to whether or not Plaintiffs approved (or acquiesced to) the format and content of the training. The record confirms that the City and Plaintiffs met on June 29, 2015 and again on July 16, 2015 to discuss (among other things) early draft(s) of the "Calhoun" training that were not acceptable to Plaintiffs. While not entirely clear, it appears the parties discussed revisions that would (in theory) make the draft training acceptable and agreed that a five-day period would be sufficient for Plaintiffs' counsel to review and comment on the revised training. The dispute boils down to a July 17, from City counsel to Plaintiffs' counsel ostensibly attaching for review the revised training materials, which incorporated certain revisions discussed at the June 29 and/or July 16 meetings. The record confirms that the City waited five days after sending the 5
6 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 6 of 25 revised training materials on July 17. Then, when no objection (or any other response) was received, the City interpreted Plaintiffs' silence as approval/acquiescence and proceeded with "Calhoun" training despite the lack of an affirmative confirmation regarding the format and content of the training from Plaintiffs' counsel. The City proceeded with the initial "Calhoun" training from July 28 through August 12, completing the training of every police officer in the APD, with the exception of those on extended leave, on or before August 17, 2015, as required by the timing component of paragraph 1, and as more particularly set forth by the Declaration of Major Darin Schierbaum filed with the Court on August 21, 2015 [Dkt. No ]. In fact, the format and content of the 2015 "Calhoun" training are not acceptable to Plaintiffs (although Plaintiffs' counsel confirmed the training was much improved), and Plaintiffs' counsel deny receiving the July 17 enclosing the training materials for their review. Notwithstanding, it appears Plaintiffs knew the City was proceeding with the initial "Calhoun" training and did not intervene to prevent the training in progress. In lieu of engaging in potentially complex and expensive discovery (including metadata/esi) to determine whether or not the July 17 was, in 6
7 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 7 of 25 fact, sent by City counsel and/or received by Plaintiffs' counsel, the Special Master is inclined to take the mere existence of the July 17 at face value as standing for the proposition that the City did, in fact, attempt to provide the revised training materials to Plaintiffs' counsel prior to conducting the training, and did, in fact, attempt to achieve a format and content acceptable to Plaintiffs (albeit unsuccessfully) through meetings with Plaintiffs' counsel and a good faith revision and review process. It would be impossible for the Special Master to find complete compliance due to the subjective element of paragraph 1 requiring that the format and content be "acceptable to Plaintiffs." It is not. However, it is also not possible for the City to return to August 2015 to timely ascertain that Plaintiffs did not receive the July 17 , and it appears clear that the City attempted to comply with (and substantially complied with) the spirit of paragraph 1. In coming to this conclusion, the Special Master does not condone the City's behavior in moving forward without receiving positive confirmation from Plaintiffs, which would have been, in hindsight, the more prudent course. However, the Special Master gives the City the benefit of the doubt based on the fact that City counsel and Plaintiffs' counsel had exchanged s previously and continue to do so, with no other known issues. 7
8 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 8 of 25 Further, the City submitted the training to Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Council ("POST"), who independently reviewed the training and concluded that although certain aspects of the training could be improved, "It appears that this training was structured to meet the aspects agreed upon in the consent order. The objectives of the training are clear " Finally, a finding of non-compliance would undermine the substantial progress made by the parties in the past 3 months in reaching agreement as to detailed procedures (set forth more fully in the Procedures Order) that will undoubtedly prevent any misunderstanding as to whether the format and content of the training is "acceptable to Plaintiffs" going forward. Based on the foregoing, the Special Master is inclined to find that the City technically and substantially complied with paragraph 1, provided that the City confirm its good faith through completion of the procedures related to future training set forth by the Procedures Order, which will result in a "Calhoun" training program with content and in a format acceptable to Plaintiffs. This approach is consistent with the parties' prospective focus and approach in the Procedures Order. Accordingly, compliance will be revisited in conjunction with future compliance reports. 8
9 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 9 of 25 Paragraph 2 - Requirement to provide recurrent "Calhoun" training consistent with Section 1 of the 2015 Order every two years. The recurrent training required by paragraph 2 must be completed by August Consequently, compliance is not ripe for determination. Further, all "Calhoun" training has been stayed by the Procedures Order pending approval of a "Calhoun" training program with content and format acceptable to Plaintiffs. Compliance will be re-visited when this matter is ripe for determination. Paragraph 3 - Requirement for City to provide Plaintiffs' counsel with (i) reasonable advance notice of dates and places of proposed training; (ii) copies of proposed training materials sufficiently in advance of training so Plaintiffs' counsel may review and consult with the City; (iii) a videorecording of each training session conducted pursuant to the 2015 Order; and (iv) an affidavit attesting to the names of all officers who attended training and the dates of their attendance. Additional fact-finding is necessary before the Special Master can make a determination as to compliance with paragraph 3. Accordingly, final findings are withheld or deferred out of necessity, provided this issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. 9
10 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 10 of 25 Paragraph 4 - Requirements to (a) within 20 days amend any SOP dealing with dress code to require all police officers in uniform to wear a conspicuously visible nametag (except in limited circumstances) and (b) to distribute a Chief of Police Command Memorandum emphasizing certain officer identification requirements set forth more particularly in the 2015 Order. Documents received from the City of Atlanta confirm, at a minimum, timely partial or technical compliance with paragraphs 4(a) and 4(b) of the 2015 Order. By way of illustration with respect to paragraph 4(a), ADP.SOP.2010 and ADP.SOP.2130 were signed into effect by Chief of Police George Turner on May 29, 2015 and filed with the Court on June 3, 2015 [Dkt. Nos , 291-3], with no objection filed by Plaintiffs. They provide (in relevant part) as follows: 10
11 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 11 of 25 11
12 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 12 of 25 With respect to paragraph 4(b), Chief Turner's Command Memorandum was distributed to each APD employee on May 26, 2015, and APD records confirm the date the Command Memorandum was reviewed by each of 1806 APD officers, generally on or before May 29, Notwithstanding these initial findings, the Special Master has determined that additional fact finding is necessary before a final finding as to compliance would be appropriate. Accordingly, a final finding of compliance is withheld or deferred out of necessity, pending review of additional evidence by the Special Master, and the issue of complete compliance will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 5 - Requirement to provide Plaintiffs' counsel, on or before May 22, 2015, with a spreadsheet providing certain categories of information set forth more particularly in the 2015 Order with regard to each complaint of 12
13 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 13 of 25 police misconduct and each Office of Professional Standards (OPS) investigation received or commenced after December 8, The record confirms that the City did, in fact, provide Plaintiffs with a spreadsheet responsive to paragraph 5 on May 22, Disputes exist as to whether the spreadsheet provided on May 22 was fully responsive. The disputes appear to boil down to reasonable, differing opinions regarding the scope of paragraph 5. Plaintiffs' counsel perceives two deficiencies with respect to the City's May 22 production. First, Plaintiffs allege that the spreadsheet lacked identification of "the law, rule, or SOP the officer was alleged to have violated" as required by paragraph 5(e) (emphasis added). Second, Plaintiffs allege that the spreadsheet (erroneously) omitted internal investigations, which Plaintiffs contend are encompassed by the language including "each Office of Professional Standards (OPS) investigation." The City takes the position that the spreadsheet was fully compliant, and, to the extent it was not, the City has cured any deficiency. The Special Master finds that the City's spreadsheet was technically compliant with paragraph 5(e) inasmuch as the spreadsheet, without exception, identifies the specific work rule alleged to have been violated. There can be no dispute the paragraph 5(e) requirement is disjunctive. 13
14 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 14 of 25 Further, when Plaintiffs raised the issue, the City did not ignore the request, but treated it as a "section 11" request, and set out to provide the additional information requested, including which SOP was alleged to have been violated. Indeed, by June 19, 2015, the City had provided at least three updated spreadsheets itemizing all internal investigations within the more expansive interpretation of paragraph 5. Additionally, the City represents that it has now provided electronically searchable copies of all responsive OPS files that support the spreadsheets and provide the SOP alleged to have been violated. Finally, the City has committed (in the Procedures Order) to continue providing all OPS files and even more comprehensive OPS spreadsheets with additional categories of information requested by Plaintiffs and the Special Master as necessary to monitor compliance. Without deciding whether or not the initial production was complete, the Special Master finds that the City has achieved, at a minimum, technical and substantial compliance with paragraph 5 by curing any apparent deficiencies, if any, despite reasonable differing opinions as to scope. Nonetheless, given the ongoing nature of the OPS disclosure requirements and the City's commitments, compliance will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. 14
15 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 15 of 25 Paragraph 6 - Requirement to implement within 60 days a form that is acceptable to Plaintiffs' counsel for use in complying with the requirements of Section 4 ("Documentation of Warrantless Seizures") and Section 5 ("Documentation of ID Checks") of the 2010 Order, to provide copies of completed forms upon request for same at no charge, and to maintain the forms as public records. There is no dispute as to the City's technical compliance with paragraph 6. Documentation confirms that City counsel collaborated with Plaintiffs' counsel to accomplish a mutually acceptable form, which was implemented by the City within the time frame allotted. A declaration confirming the City's compliance was filed with the Court on July 20, 2015 [Dkt. No. 295], with no objection filed by Plaintiffs. Notwithstanding, Plaintiffs dispute whether the agreed forms are being utilized effectively by APD. Without making a finding as to whether the City's training program has been effective in this regard, the Special Master finds that the City has made good faith efforts to train APD employees how to utilize the required forms. Specifically, the City (by way of example, not an exhaustive list): implemented ADP.SOP.3020; 15
16 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 16 of 25 provided training on ADP.SOP.3020 (more specifically, Section thereof) in the City's August 2015 training and additional training programs; conferred with Plaintiffs' counsel to ascertain what would improve the APD's effectiveness in utilizing the forms; and committed to additional actions in furtherance of the strategies proposed by Plaintiffs' counsel, including (i) development of a flow chart for circulation to APD (upon approval by Plaintiffs of same); and (ii) agreement to coordinate with Plaintiffs to develop more effective training programs, as set forth in the Procedures Order. Based on the foregoing, the Special Master finds that the City of Atlanta has technically and substantially complied with the requirements of paragraph 6. However, due to the ongoing nature of the City's commitments and potential unresolved issues related to the effectiveness of training, compliance will be revisited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 7 - Requirement to amend, within 20 days, APD.SOP.3065 to restore certain language. Documents received from the City of Atlanta confirm timely compliance with the technical requirements of paragraph 7 of the 2015 Order. Revised 16
17 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 17 of 25 ADP.SOP.3065 was signed into effect by Chief of Police George Turner on May 29, 2015, and provides as follows: In addition to technical compliance, the City has taken additional steps to ensure that the operative language is not later removed. See, for example, the below: Finally, amended ADP.SOP.3065 was filed with the Court on June 3, 2015 [Dkt. No ], with no objection filed by Plaintiffs. 17
18 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 18 of 25 Based on the foregoing, the Special Master finds that the City timely complied with the technical requirements of paragraph 7. Notwithstanding, due to the ongoing nature of the paragraph 7 requirements (see also, paragraph 8), compliance will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 8 - Requirement that the "Calhoun" related amendments to SOP's pursuant to 2010 Order and 2011 Order shall be permanent; and City shall inform Plaintiffs of any revisions to the affected SOP's within 5 days. The Special Master has reviewed the APD SOP's and has confirmed that amendments were made to each of the following SOP's in an effort to achieve compliance with the Court Orders: (i) APD.SOP.3020; (ii) APD.SOP.3030; (iii) APD.SOP.3065; (iv) APD.SOP.2010; (v) APD.SOP.2011; (vi) APD.SOP.2130; (vii) APD.SOP.3060; (viii) ADP.SOP.1060; (ix) ADP.SOP.2020; (x) ADP.SOP.2060; (xi) ADP.SOP.2080; (xii) ADP.SOP. 3110; and (xiii) ADP.SOP Each of the aforementioned SOP's was signed into effect by Chief of Police George Turner on May 29, 2015, and copies of the amended SOP's were filed with this Court as exhibits to a Notice of Compliance filed June 3, 2015 [Dkt. No. 291], with no objection filed by Plaintiffs. With regard to "Calhoun" related amendments 18
19 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 19 of 25 to the aforementioned SOP's, the City has taken additional steps to ensure that the operative language is not later removed, consistent with its handling of ADP.SOP.3065 (see above). The City has also represented to the Special Master that the amended SOP's remain in effect as of the filing of this 9/29 Compliance Report. Finally, the Procedures Order institutes quarterly review of all SOP's by the Special Master and Plaintiffs' counsel to guarantee and confirm ongoing compliance. Additional fact finding and scrutiny are necessary before the Special Master can find that the ADP SOP's, as amended, have fully implemented "all [] revisions required by [the Court Orders]." Therefore, and due to the ongoing nature of the paragraph 8 requirements, pending further review, the Special Master believes a finding of compliance eventually will be appropriate and forthcoming, but the Special Master withholds or defers any final finding out of necessity at this time. This issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. 19
20 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 20 of 25 Paragraph 9- Requirement to comply with future post-judgment discovery requests pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, and all Standing Orders of this Court. Based on the agreement of Plaintiffs and the City to stay all pending postjudgment discovery requests and to deal with these matters as set forth in the Procedures Order, the Special Master finds that compliance or non-compliance with paragraph 9 is not currently ripe for determination. Accordingly, and because additional fact finding would be necessary for the Special Master to formulate an opinion and basis therefor as to compliance, findings are presently withheld or deferred out of necessity, provided this issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 10- Requirement to respond to outstanding discovery requests no later than Friday, May 22, Based on the agreement of Plaintiffs and the City to stay all pending postjudgment discovery requests and to deal with these matters as set forth in the Procedures Order, the Special Master finds that compliance or non-compliance with paragraph 10 is not currently ripe for determination. Accordingly, and because additional fact finding would be necessary for the Special Master to 20
21 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 21 of 25 formulate an opinion and basis therefor as to compliance, findings are presently withheld or deferred out of necessity, provided this issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 11- Requirement to comply within 15 days with any reasonable request made by Plaintiffs' counsel seeking records or documents related to the City's compliance with the Court Orders. Based on the agreement of Plaintiffs and the City to stay all pending "section 11" requests and to deal with these matters as set forth in the Procedures Order, the Special Master finds that compliance or non-compliance with paragraph 11 is not currently ripe for determination. Accordingly, and because additional fact finding would be necessary for the Special Master to formulate an opinion and basis therefor as to compliance, findings are presently withheld or deferred out of necessity, provided this issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 12- Requirement for the City to reimburse Plaintiffs' counsel for any reasonable fees and costs expended to monitor compliance with the Court Orders. The Special Master has reviewed the record related to paragraph 12 and finds that the City is generally and technically compliant; however, due to the 21
22 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 22 of 25 ongoing nature of the paragraph 12 requirements, a final finding is withheld or deferred out of necessity, and this issue will be re-visited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. Paragraph 13- Requirement to reimburse Plaintiffs' counsel for fees and costs incurred to bring the contempt proceeding. The Special Master has reviewed the record related to paragraph 13 and finds that the City fully complied with the requirement of paragraph 13. Paragraph 14- Providing that the terms of the 2015 Order (with a limited exception) shall expire six years from the date of entry and that the 2015 Order shall have no effect on the terms of the 2010 Order and 2011 Order. Paragraph 14 sets forth the 6-year timeframe contemplated by the 2015 Order and reiterates that the 2015 Order does not overrule, supersede, or otherwise affect the requirements set forth by the 2010 Order and the 2011 Order. Beyond these general concepts, paragraph 14 does not impose any new or additional requirements on the City. Due to the ongoing nature of the paragraph 14 requirements (for 6 years) and the overall applicability to the other requirements of the Court Orders, the Special Master finds that compliance with paragraph 14 is not presently ripe for 22
23 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 23 of 25 compliance and that additional fact finding would be necessary for the Special Master to formulate an opinion and basis therefor as to compliance. Accordingly, a final finding is withheld or deferred out of necessity, and this issue will be revisited, as necessary and appropriate, in conjunction with future quarterly reports. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Generally, except as set forth otherwise above, the Special Master preliminarily finds that the City has complied or attempted in good faith to comply with the requirements of the Court Orders after entry of the 2015 Order, provided the Special Master will re-visit all of the initial findings herein in conjunction with future quarterly reports as additional facts are discovered and evaluated. Along these lines, the Special Master will continue to develop the record related to compliance through additional discovery within the powers set forth by the Special Master Order and requests that the parties immediately make the Special Master aware of any circumstances that would prevent a finding of compliance, so the Special Master can evaluate the need for an evidentiary hearing in advance of the next quarterly compliance report due December 22, In light of the foregoing, Special Master respectfully recommends that the Court adopt this 9/29 Compliance Report and defer any further action (beyond entry of the Procedures Order) at this time. 23
24 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 24 of 25 Respectfully submitted by: /s Joe D. Whitley JOE D. WHITLEY Georgia Bar No Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC 3414 Peachtree Road, NE Monarch Plaza, Suite 1600 Atlanta, GA (404) Special Master 24
25 Case 1:09-cv TCB Document 324 Filed 09/29/16 Page 25 of 25 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I have electronically filed the foregoing SPECIAL MASTER QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 29, 2016 with the Clerk of Court using the Court's CM/ECF system, which will automatically send electronic notification of such filing to all parties through their counsel of record. This 29th day of September, /s/ Joe D. Whitley Joe D. Whitley Georgia Bar No BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, PC 3415 Peachtree Road NE Monarch Plaza, Suite 100 Atlanta, Georgia Telephone: Facsimile: jwhitley@bakerdonelson.com Special Master 25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:09-cv-03286-TCB Document 391 Filed 10/23/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEOFFREY CALHOUN, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CIVIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:15-cv-02594-MHC Document 12 Filed 10/14/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CODE REVISION COMMISION on behalf of and for the
More informationCase 1:17-cr JRH-BKE Document 275 Filed 04/27/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION
Case 1:17-cr-00034-JRH-BKE Document 275 Filed 04/27/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiffs, v. REALITY LEIGH WINNER
More informationCase Doc 65 Filed 11/08/17 Entered 11/08/17 14:21:15 Desc Main Document Page 6 of 24
Document Page 6 of 24 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION In re BESTWALL LLC, 1 Chapter 11 Case No. 17-31795 Debtor. NOTICE, CASE MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:09-cv-03286-TCB Document 281 Filed 03/17/15 Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) GEOFFREY CALHOUN, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil
More informationEEOC v. Oglethorpe University
Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 5-2-2007 EEOC v. Oglethorpe University Judge Orinda Evans Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION
Case 4:05-cv-00201-HLM Document 113-1 Filed 07/07/2006 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION COMMON CAUSE / GEORGIA, ) et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL
More informationscc Doc 51 Filed 07/16/15 Entered 07/16/15 15:54:38 Main Document Pg 1 of 23
Pg 1 of 23 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) SABINE OIL & GAS CORPORATION, et al., 1 ) Case No. 15-11835 (SCC) ) Debtors. ) (Joint Administration Requested)
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:09-cv-03286-TCB Document 265-1 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEOFFREY CALHOUN, et al. Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD PENNINGTON,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION. Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION FILE. v. ) NO.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION COMMON CAUSE/GEORGIA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION FILE. v. ) NO. 4:05-CV-201-HLM ) MS. EVON BILLUPS, Superintendent
More informationbeing preempted by the court's criminal calendar.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF «County» «PlaintiffName», vs. «DefendantName», Plaintiff, Defendant. Case No. «CaseNumber» SCHEDULING
More informationAPPEAL A FORCIBLE DETAINER JUDGMENT
MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE COURT How to APPEAL A FORCIBLE DETAINER JUDGMENT Justice Court in Maricopa County June 23, 2005 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED FORM (# MARICOPA COUNTY JUSTICE COURT Either party may appeal
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION HIGH QUALITY PRINTING ) INVENTIONS, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. v. ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PRINTOGRAPH,
More informationTHE RETIREMENT BOARD OF THE FIREMEN S ANNUITY AND BENEFIT FUND OF CHICAGO
THE RETIREMENT BOARD OF THE FIREMEN S ANNUITY AND BENEFIT FUND OF CHICAGO Procedural Rules Established Pursuant to 40 ILCS 5/6-191 Governing Applications for and Administrative Hearings upon Applications
More informationCASE NUMBER: UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NUMBER: UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-01427-TCB-WSD-BBM Document 160 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Georgia State Conference of the NAACP, et
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION
Case 4:14-cv-00139-HLM Document 34 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., and DAVID JAMES, Plaintiffs,
More informationARBITRATION RULES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ADR COUNCIL
ARBITRATION RULES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ADR COUNCIL TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE RULES AS PART OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT PAGES 1.1 Application... 1 1.2 Scope... 1 II. TRIBUNALS AND ADMINISTRATION 2.1 Name
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 LENNELL DUNBAR, Plaintiff, v. EMW INC., Defendant. Case No.: :-CV-00- JLT SCHEDULING ORDER (Fed. R. Civ. P. Pleading Amendment Deadline:
More informationCase: 1:13-cv Document #: 382 Filed: 03/08/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:7778
Case: 1:13-cv-05795 Document #: 382 Filed: 03/08/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:7778 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION IN RE: STERICYCLE, INC., STERI-SAFE CONTRACT LITIGATION
More informationUNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRE-TRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA., CASE NO. -CA- CIVIL DIVISION 20 Plaintiff, vs., Defendant. / UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:07-cv-00896-BBM Document 18 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION JACK E. ALDERMAN * * Plaintiff, * CIVIL ACTION
More informationDEPOSIT AGREEMENT GUARANTEEING SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENTS WITH LETTER OF CREDIT
DEPOSIT AGREEMENT GUARANTEEING SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENTS WITH LETTER OF CREDIT This Deposit Agreement Guaranteeing Site Plan Improvements with Letter of Credit (the Agreement ) is made and entered into as
More informationCase 3:17-cv L Document 25 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID 171
Case 3:17-cv-03300-L Document 25 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID 171 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MBA ENGINEERING, INC., as Sponsor and Administrator
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. versus Civil Action 4:17 cv 02946
Case 4:17-cv-02946 Document 3 Filed in TXSD on 10/03/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION United States District Court Southern District of Texas
More informationCase 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :-cv-000-jcc Document Filed // Page of THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 KIM BAROVIC, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN A. BALLMER, Defendant.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Case 4:17-cv-00516-MW-CAS Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION JOHN DOE, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 4:17-cv-516 On removal from
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:06-cv-01586-CAP Document 80 Filed 05/16/2007 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION JAMES CAMP, * * Plaintiff, * * v. * CIVIL ACTION
More informationBYLAWS OF THE TALLAHASSEE-LEON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
0 0 0 0 BYLAWS OF THE TALLAHASSEE-LEON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION These Bylaws govern the actions of the Tallahassee-Leon County Planning Commission in its capacity as the Planning Commission, the Local
More informationUNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING PRETRIAL MATTERS TO BE COMPLETED
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. CIVIL DIVISION 37 Plaintiff(s), vs. Defendant(s). / UNIFORM ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL; PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE
More informationSigned June 24, 2017 United States Bankruptcy Judge
The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described. Signed June 24, 2017 United States Bankruptcy Judge IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN
More informationTHE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 3.05 PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT WHEREAS, The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, 932.701-932.7062,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 ALEX SOTO and VINCE EAGEN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiffs,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No. 5:07-CV-231 PAMELA L. HENSLEY, Plaintiff, MOTION FOR LEAVE v. TO AMEND ANSWER JOHNSTON COUNTY BOARD
More informationTHIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT CARE SERVICES BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC.
THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED BETWEEN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND INDIAN RIVER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC. THIS THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT CARE SERVICES (this Agreement or
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 115-cv-03814-AJB Document 25 Filed 05/24/16 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION TEWANA MITCHELL, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., and DAVID JAMES, Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. v. 4:14-CV-139-HLM U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
More informationADR CODE OF PROCEDURE
Last Revised 12/1/2006 ADR CODE OF PROCEDURE Rules & Procedures for Arbitration RULE 1: SCOPE OF RULES A. The arbitration Rules and Procedures ( Rules ) govern binding arbitration of disputes or claims
More informationORDER ESTABLISHING MOTION PRACTICE PROCEDURE. THIS COURT, having determined the need to facilitate an orderly progression of
ORDER ESTABLISHING MOTION PRACTICE PROCEDURE THIS COURT, having determined the need to facilitate an orderly progression of certain civil matters before this Court, finds as follows: A. Discovery motions
More informationDEPOSIT AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENTS WITH LETTER OF CREDIT
DEPOSIT AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENTS WITH LETTER OF CREDIT This Deposit Agreement for Maintenance of Site Plan Improvements with Letter of Credit (the Agreement ) is made and entered
More informationMINNESOTA JUDICIAL TRAINING UPDATE PARENTING TIME EXPEDITOR VS PARENTING CONSULTANT
MINNESOTA JUDICIAL TRAINING UPDATE PARENTING TIME EXPEDITOR VS PARENTING CONSULTANT QUESTION: You Are Presiding Over A High Conflict Family Law Case With Numerous Parenting Time Disputes. You Would Like
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:12-cv-02117-AT Document 17 Filed 08/30/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION WESTERN WORLD INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v.
More informationLITIGATION SECTION OF ATLANTA BAR ASSOCIATION, INC. AMENDED BYLAWS. Dated As of February 2015
LITIGATION SECTION OF ATLANTA BAR ASSOCIATION, INC. AMENDED BYLAWS Dated As of February 2015 1 ARTICLE I NAME, PURPOSE, FISCAL YEAR, LIMITATIONS, DEFINITIONS SECTION 1.01. NAME. The name of this Section
More informationPORTIONS OF ILLINOIS FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER ACT 735 ILCS 5/9-101 et. seq.
Sec. 9-102. When action may be maintained. (a) The person entitled to the possession of lands or tenements may be restored thereto under any of the following circumstances: (1) When a forcible entry is
More informationRULES OF PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COWLITZ COUNTY HEARINGS EXAMINER
RULES OF PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COWLITZ COUNTY HEARINGS EXAMINER INTRODUCTION The following Rules of Procedure have been adopted by the Cowlitz County Hearing Examiner. The examiner and deputy examiners
More informationKing County Prosecuting Attorney's Office Brady Committee Protocol
DANIEL T. SATTERBERG PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Office of the Prosecuting Attorney CRIMINAL DIVISION W554 Courthouse 516 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 296-9000 Prosecuting Attorney's Office Brady
More informationCase 1:09-cv TWT Document 3 Filed 03/24/2009 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:09-cv-00594-TWT Document 3 Filed 03/24/2009 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC., And CHRISTOPHER RAISSI,
More informationCase 1:15-cv ELR Document 60 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 21
Case 1:15-cv-04316-ELR Document 60 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION BRIDGET SMITH, RENE TAN, VICTOR CASTANEDA, KRISADA
More informationBritish Columbia. Health Professions Review Board. Rules of Practice and Procedure for Reviews under the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
British Columbia Health Professions Review Board Rules of Practice and Procedure for Reviews under the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 These rules for reviews to the Health Professions Review
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:09-md-02089-TCB Document 286 Filed 05/12/11 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION IN RE: DELTA/AIRTRAN BAGGAGE FEE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NO. 1:15-CV TDS-JEP. Plaintiffs, Defendants.
Case 1:15-cv-00399-TDS-JEP Document 151 Filed 06/08/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NO. 1:15-CV-00399-TDS-JEP SANDRA LITTLE COVINGTON, et al.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MARY LOU BENNEK, Derivatively on ) Behalf of THE HOME DEPOT, INC.
Case 1:15-cv-03650-TWT Document 21 Filed 01/20/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MARY LOU BENNEK, Derivatively on Behalf of THE HOME DEPOT, INC.,
More informationRULES OF SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PART ONE RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL PROCEEDINGS
RULES OF SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA PART ONE RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL PROCEEDINGS Rule 1:18. Pretrial Scheduling Order. A. In any civil case the parties, by counsel of record, may agree and submit for approval
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION IN RE: AMERICAN HISTORIC RACING MOTORCYCLE ASSOCIATION, LTD., Debtor. BK No. 06-06626-MH3-11 ORDER CONFIRMING
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-01427-TCB-WSD-BBM Document 80 Filed 01/24/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION NAACP, et al., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION FILE
More informationSUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA. Atlanta June 11, The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed:
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Atlanta June 11, 2015 The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed: It is ordered that new Uniform Magistrate Court Rule 7.5 (relating
More informationCase 4:11-cv RH-CAS Document 80 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 7
Case 4:11-cv-00628-RH-CAS Document 80 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA, FLORIDA
More informationCase 1:07-cv NGG-RLM Document 1468 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 37353
Case 1:07-cv-02067-NGG-RLM Document 1468 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 37353 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, THE VULCAN
More information- 1 - Questions? Call:
Patrick Sinay, et al. v. Essendant Co., et al. Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC651043 ATTENTION: ALL CURRENT AND FORMER HOURLY-PAID OR NON-EXEMPT EMPLOYEES
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MICHAEL L. SHAKMAN, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Case Number: 69 C 2145 v. ) ) Magistrate Judge Schenkier COOK
More informationCase 1:17-cv TCB-WSD-BBM Document 44 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:17-cv-01427-TCB-WSD-BBM Document 44 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION GEORGIA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP, as
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
2:09-cv-13616-AJT-MKM Doc # 250 Filed 04/22/14 Pg 1 of 8 Pg ID 10555 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Dennis Black, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Pension
More informationProposed Rules for First Reading page 2. Rule 4.3 Withdrawal page 2. Rule 5.1 Prompt Completion page 5
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFORM RULES OF SUPERIOR COURT APPROVED FOR FIRST READING, JULY 24, 2013 Proposed Rules for First Reading page 2 Rule 4.3 Withdrawal page 2 Rule 5.1 Prompt Completion page 5
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS NICHOLAS CHALUPA, ) Individually and on Behalf of All Other ) No. 1:12-cv-10868-JCB Persons Similarly Situated, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ) UNITED PARCEL
More informationCASE NUMBER: DIV 71. It appearing that this case is at issue and can be set for trial, it is ORDERED as follows:
Plaintiff(s), vs. Defendant(s). / IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NUMBER: DIV 71 UNIFORM ORDER REGARDING SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL, PRE-TRIAL
More informationEEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc.
Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 6-22-2010 EEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc. Judge Horace T. Ward Follow this and additional
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:06-cv-01891-JTC Document 8 Filed 08/22/2006 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM
More informationCase 5:08-cv JW Document 49 Filed 02/05/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SAN JOSE DIVISION
Case :0-cv-0-JW Document Filed 0/0/00 Page of MCKOOL SMITH, P.C. Gayle Rosenstein Klein (State Bar No. ) Park Avenue, Suite 00 New York, NY 00 Telephone: () 0-0 Facsimile: () 0- Email: gklein@mckoolsmith.com
More informationCase 1:14-md JMF Document 3703 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:14-md-02543-JMF Document 3703 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------x IN
More informationTEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY
TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION BYLAWS September 29, 2010 1 AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF THE TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ARTICLE I NAME The name of the Corporation governed by these bylaws
More informationCase reg Doc 978 Filed 12/19/17 Entered 12/19/17 15:39:15. Debtor.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------x In re: FEDERATION EMPLOYMENT AND GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC. d/b/a FEGS 1, Chapter 11
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:10-cv-01062-ESH -TBG -HHK Document 50 Filed 10/08/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF GEORGIA, v. Plaintiff, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. in his official
More informationCase: 25CH1:18-cv Document #: 19 Filed: 05/25/2018 Page 1 of 2 IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Case: 25CH1:18-cv-00612 Document #: 19 Filed: 05/25/2018 Page 1 of 2 IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT LET S TAKE BACK CONTROL LTD. A/K/A FAIR VOTE PROJECT AND
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:16-cv-00452-TCB Document 28 Filed 07/21/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION COMMON CAUSE and * GEORGIA STATE CONFERENCE * OF
More informationCase: 1:14-cv Document #: 58 Filed: 11/10/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:314
Case: 1:14-cv-01741 Document #: 58 Filed: 11/10/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:314 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JASON DOUGLAS, individually and on
More informationREMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT. Seminar Presentation Rob Foos
REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT Seminar Presentation Rob Foos Attorney Strategy o The removal of cases from state to federal courts cannot be found in the Constitution of the United States; it is purely statutory
More informationCOUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ASSOCIATION OF OHIO
December 7, 2015 CODE OF REGULATIONS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' ASSOCIATION OF OHIO Suzanne K. Dulaney Executive Director Includes Amendments Adopted on: 12/11/2000 12/06/2010 12/07/2015 ARTICLE I Name and
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CASE NO.:
Case 1:17-cv-02047-ODE Document 1 Filed 06/05/17 Page 1 of 14 MATTHEW CHARRON, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION
Document Page 1 of 131 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION In re: XINERGY LTD., et al., Debtors. 1 Chapter 11 Case No. 15-70444 (PMB) (Jointly Administered)
More informationPROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE MINING AND LANDS COMMISSIONER
PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE MINING AND LANDS COMMISSIONER Office of the Mining and Lands Commissioner Box 330, 24th Floor, 700 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5G 126 Table of Contents PROCEDURAL
More information2. During the complaint intake process, no questions shall be asked of a complainant regarding their immigration status.
Distribution: All Personnel Number of Pages: 1 of 11 I. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to comply with Public Act No. 14-166 and to provide a uniform policy to accept, process, investigate, take
More informationCase3:12-cv WHO Document276 Filed02/14/14 Page1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.
Case:-cv-0-WHO Document Filed0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 JASON TRABAKOOLAS, SHEILA STETSON, CHRISTIE WHEELER, JACK MOONEY, and KEVEN TURNER individually
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CURLING PLAINTIFFS S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Case 1:17-cv-02989-AT Document 260 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION DONNA CURLING, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS SAMUEL K. LIPARI, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 07-CV-02146-CM-DJW U.S. BANCORP, and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendants. DEFENDANT S MEMORANDUM
More informationFor Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy
Information or instructions: Motion affidavit & order for a new trial 1. A motion for new trial requests the court to reconsider its judgment for the reasons stated in the motion. 2. The motion should
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Case 1:16-cv-04110-TWT Document 1 Filed 11/02/16 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD. a United Kingdom Limited Company, Plaintiff,
More informationSUPREME COURT - NASSAU COUNTY IAS PART 14 PART MATRIMONIAL RULES & PROCEDURES (revised 05/23/17)
SUPREME COURT - NASSAU COUNTY IAS PART 14 PART MATRIMONIAL RULES & PROCEDURES (revised 05/23/17) Justice: Law Clerk: Secretary: Part Clerk: HON. ROBERT A. BRUNO RACHEL ZAMPINO, ESQ. CORINNE GLANZMAN BILL
More informationCase 2:17-cv GAM Document 56 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:17-cv-00178-GAM Document 56 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CHRISTOPHER WALTER, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
More informationCase pwb Doc 281 Filed 10/28/16 Entered 10/28/16 13:58:15 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 12
Document Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION In re: ) Chapter 11 ) ASTROTURF, LLC, ) Case No. 16-41504-PWB ) ) Debtor. ) ) DEBTOR S OBJECTION
More informationGENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 H 1 HOUSE BILL 380. Short Title: Amend RCP/Electronically Stored Information.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 0 H 1 HOUSE BILL 0 Short Title: Amend RCP/Electronically Stored Information. (Public) Sponsors: Representatives Glazier, T. Moore, Ross, and Jordan (Primary Sponsors).
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 1:07CV23-SPM/AK O R D E R
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION INFINITE ENERGY, INC., Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO. 1:07CV23-SPM/AK THAI HENG CHANG, Defendant. / O R D E R Presently
More informationCase: 1:11-cv Document #: 353 Filed: 01/20/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:4147
Case: 1:11-cv-08176 Document #: 353 Filed: 01/20/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:4147 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION IN RE SOUTHWEST AIRLINES ) VOUCHER
More informationSTATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : COUNTY FAMILY COURT BRANCH STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR COLLABORATIVE LAW
STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : COUNTY FAMILY COURT BRANCH In re the marriage of: Joint Petitioner-Wife Case Code: 40101 (Divorce) and Case No. Joint Petitioner-Husband STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR COLLABORATIVE
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS ELECTRONICALLY FILED 2014-Apr-16 13:27:13 60CV-14-1495 C06D06 : 17 Pages FREEDOM KOHLS; TOYLANDA SMITH; JOE FLAKES; and BARRY HAAS PLAINTIFFS vs. Case No.
More informationStreamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures
RESOLUTIONS, LLC s GUIDE TO DISPUTE RESOLUTION Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures 1. Scope of Rules The RESOLUTIONS, LLC Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures ("Rules") govern binding
More informationFEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANN I. JONES RAYMOND E. McKOWN GREGORY W. STAPLES Federal Trade Commission 11000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 13209 Los Angeles, California 90024 (310) 235-4040 JOHN ANDREW SINGER Federal Trade Commission 6th
More informationThe Avoidance Procedures
The Avoidance Procedures 1. Notice of Applicability: A. The Avoidance Procedures apply only to Avoidance Actions commenced by the Trustee after the approval of these Avoidance Procedures in which (a) the
More informationCase cec Doc 326 Filed 10/30/14 Entered 10/31/14 10:01:10
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: SUFFOLK REGIONAL OFF-TRACK BETTING CORPORATION, Chapter 9 Case No. 12-43503-CEC Debtor. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER
More informationAMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION. Incorporated under the Laws of the State of Georgia
AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION Incorporated under the Laws of the State of Georgia William W. Douglas III Chair Effective Date: July 1, 2017 AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS
More informationIn the United States Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:17-cv-03000-SGB Document 106 Filed 12/08/17 Page 1 of 8 In the United States Court of Federal Claims Filed: December 8, 2017 IN RE ADDICKS AND BARKER (TEXAS) FLOOD-CONTROL RESERVOIRS Master Docket
More information